Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NFLPA V.S. Owners, Who is to blame?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I love how there are more votes for this being McDaniels' fault than there are for the owners.
    sigpic
    - ★ -
    2012 Adopt a Bronco : Joe Mays

    Comment


    • Originally posted by MH Stampede View Post
      So you are saying it is acceptable for a couple teams (and thereby owners) to actually lose money, as long as others aren't??

      By the way, the offer the NFLPA turned down last friday included full healthcare for the players AND their families. So that argument is just another red herring.
      The Saints lost money in 2005 then the next year they made more then 6 times they lost it happens, the next year the Seahawks Colts Lions Falcons and Vikings were all losing money teams overextend their hand some years and spend more then they can afford they get cap penalties and dont make as much revenue as they planned. A lot of these owners make bad decisions and that is why they lose money.

      The 2 teams that lost money the Lions and the Dolphins both made money in a 5 year period. The Lions made and average of $9.06 mill a year in operations according to Forbes and the Dolphins made $20.84 mill it is lower then the $30 mill a year average yet they are still making money.
      2016 Draft: http://forums.denverbroncos.com/show...aft-Watch-list

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Joshecalpoly View Post
        The Saints lost money in 2005 then the next year they made more then 6 times they lost it happens, the next year the Seahawks Colts Lions Falcons and Vikings were all losing money teams overextend their hand some years and spend more then they can afford they get cap penalties and dont make as much revenue as they planned. A lot of these owners make bad decisions and that is why they lose money.

        The 2 teams that lost money the Lions and the Dolphins both made money in a 5 year period. The Lions made and average of $9.06 mill a year in operations according to Forbes and the Dolphins made $20.84 mill it is lower then the $30 mill a year average yet they are still making money.
        Gotcha.

        It is acceptable for the owners to lose money.
        sigpic

        Comment


        • Players respond to Goodell's letter

          http://www.nfllockout.com/2011/03/19...ond/#more-1245

          Dear Roger:

          This responds to the letter you sent to all NFL players on March 17.

          We start by reminding you that we were there at the negotiations and know the truth about what happened, which ultimately led the players to renounce the NFLPA’s status as the collective bargaining representative of NFL players. The players took this step only as a last resort, and only after two years of trying to reach a reasonable collective bargaining agreement and three weeks of mediation with George Cohen of the FMCS. At all times during the mediation session we had representatives at the table with the authority to make a deal. The NFL representatives at the mediation did not, and the owners were mostly absent.

          The mediation was the end of a two-year process started on May 18, 2009, when our Executive Director sent you a letter requesting audited financial statements to justify your opting out of the CBA (letter attached).

          The NFLPA did all it could to reach a fair collective bargaining agreement and made numerous proposals to address the concerns raised by the owners. In response, the owners never justified their demands for a massive give-back which would have resulted in the worst economic deal for players in major league pro sports.

          That is why we were very troubled to see your letter, and repeated press reports by yourself, Jeff Pash, and the owners, which claim that the owners met the players halfway in the negotiations, and that the owners offered a fair deal to the players.

          Your statements are false.

          We will let the facts speak for themselves.


          The proposal by the NFL was not an “a la carte” proposal. The changes in offseason workouts and other benefits to players were conditioned upon the players accepting an economic framework that was unjustified and unfair.

          Your proposal called for a pegged amount for the salary cap plus benefits starting at 141M in 2011 and increasing to 161M in 2014, regardless of NFL revenues. These amounts by themselves would have set the players back years, and were based on unrealistically low revenue projections. Your proposal also would have given the owners 100% of all revenues above the low projections, including the first year of new TV contracts in 2014. Your offer did NOT meet the players halfway when it would have given 100% of the additional revenues to the owners.

          As a result, the players’ share of NFL revenues would have suffered a massive decrease. This is clear by comparing your proposal to what the players would receive under the 50% share of all revenues they have had for the past twenty years.

          If NFL revenues grow at 8% over the next four years (consistent with Moody’s projections), which is the same growth rate it has been for the past decade, then the cap plus benefits with our historical share would be 159M in 2011 (18M more per team than your 141M proposal) and grow to 201M per team in 2014 (40M more per team than your 161M proposal).

          Your proposal would have resulted in a league-wide giveback by the players of 576M in 2011 increasing to 1.2 BILLION in 2014, for a total of more than 3.6 BILLION for just the first four years. Even if revenues increased at a slower rate of only 5%, the players would still have lost over 2 BILLION over the next four years. These amounts would be even higher if your stadium deductions apply to the first four years (your proposal did not note any such limits on these deductions).

          We believe these massive givebacks were not justified at all by the owners, especially given recent projections by Moody’s that NFL media revenues are expected to double to about 8 BILLION per year during the next TV deal.

          Given that you have repeatedly admitted that your clubs are not losing money, the billions of dollars in givebacks you proposed would have gone directly into the owners’ pockets. We understand why the owners would want to keep 100% of this additional money, but trying to sell it as a fair deal to the players is not truthful.

          You proposed a CBA term of ten years. But you did not include any proposal on the players’ share of revenues after the first four years, which left open entirely how much more the owners would have taken from the players.

          The owners continued to refuse to give any financial justification for these massive givebacks. Our auditors and bankers told us the extremely limited information you offered just a few days before the mediation ended would be meaningless.

          Your rookie compensation proposal went far beyond addressing any problem of rookie “busts”, and amounted to severely restricting veteran salaries for all or most of their careers, since most players play less than 4 years. What your letter doesn’t say is that you proposed to limit compensation long after rookies become veterans — into players’ fourth and fifth years. As our player leadership told you and the owners time and again during the negotiations, the current players would not sell out their future teammates who will be veterans in a few short years.

          Your proposal did not offer to return the 320M taken from players by the elimination of certain benefits in 2010. It also did not offer to compensate over 200 players who were adversely affected in 2010 by a change in the free agency rules. Your letter did not even address a finding by a federal judge that you orchestrated new television contracts to benefit the NFL during the lockout that you imposed.

          You continued to ask for an 18 game season, offering to delay it for only one more year (you earlier said it could not be implemented in 2011 no matter what due to logistical issues). This was so even though the players and our medical experts warned you many times that increasing the season would increase the risk of player injury and shorten careers.

          All of the other elements you offered in the mediation, which you claim the players should have been eager to accept, were conditioned on the players agreeing to a rollback of their traditional share of 50/50 of all revenues to what it was in the 1980′s, which would have given up the successes the players fought for and won by asserting their rights in court, including the financial benefits of free agency the players won in the Freeman McNeil and Reggie White litigations more than 20 years ago.
          The cap system for the past twenty years has always been one in which the players were guaranteed to share in revenue growth as partners. Your proposal would have shifted to a system in which players are told how much they will get, instead of knowing their share will grow with revenues, and end the partnership.

          You had ample time over the last two years to make a proposal that would be fair to both sides, but you failed to do so. During the last week of the mediation, we waited the entire week for the NFL to make a new economic proposal. That proposal did not come until 12:30 on Friday, and, when we examined it, we found it was worse than the proposal the NFL had made the prior week when we agreed to extend the mediation. At that point it became clear to everyone that the NFL had no intention to make a good faith effort to resolve these issues in collective bargaining and the owners were determined to carry out the lockout strategy they decided on in 2007.

          We thus had no choice except to conclude that it was in the best interests of all NFL players to renounce collective bargaining so the players could pursue their antitrust rights to stop the lockout. We no longer have the authority to collectively bargain on behalf of the NFL players, and are supporting the players who are asserting their antitrust rights in the Brady litigation. We have heard that you have offered to have discussions with representatives of the players. As you know, the players are represented by class counsel in the Brady litigation, with the NFLPA and its Executive Committee serving as an advisor to any such settlement discussions. If you have any desire to discuss a settlement of the issues in that case, you should contact Class Counsel.
          So, we should expect a war of letters in the next few weeks.
          sigpic

          Comment


          • Owners. Gripe all you want about the greed of the players, which is easier to do since they are in the public eye more, but it is the owners who are asking for more. They are the ones who opted out of the deal to begin with.
            Personal goals: GOAL WEIGHT = 250lbs
            Weight loss needed for FGW = 120 lbs
            Weight lost so far: - 24 lbs

            Comment


            • Originally posted by MH Stampede View Post
              Gotcha.

              It is acceptable for the owners to lose money.
              How is the $45.3 million the Lions made over a 5 year period losing money. All I said is some owners and GM's make bad decisions and they lose money and sometimes they overestimate the base so they will lose money like with any company bad decision making can cost you. However, the teams rarely lose money over a period of time they have 1 or 2 bad years and that tends to be it. The franchises have all reported gains over time.

              So those that think that we should bail out the owners who make bad business decisions and lose money think that should be applied to all business. Whenever an important company makes bad decisions and they are important to America the government should tax other companies doing well to bail them out? That is the argument that is being supported here. If the franchises are doing as badly as they claim then sell the company, heck the reason teams move is the owners see a more profitable location.
              2016 Draft: http://forums.denverbroncos.com/show...aft-Watch-list

              Comment




              • http://twitter.com/BroncosZone

                The Vikings punter Chris Kluwe tweeted this image on Saturday, his (edited and re-created) version of Roger... http://fb.me/W4aNpD2e
                sigpic

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Joshecalpoly View Post
                  How is the $45.3 million the Lions made over a 5 year period losing money. All I said is some owners and GM's make bad decisions and they lose money and sometimes they overestimate the base so they will lose money like with any company bad decision making can cost you. However, the teams rarely lose money over a period of time they have 1 or 2 bad years and that tends to be it. The franchises have all reported gains over time.

                  You posted that the lions lost money one year. You were fine with that. So, you are fine with teams losing money. It may have been just one year. But they still lost money.


                  So those that think that we should bail out the owners who make bad business decisions and lose money think that should be applied to all business. Whenever an important company makes bad decisions and they are important to America the government should tax other companies doing well to bail them out? That is the argument that is being supported here. If the franchises are doing as badly as they claim then sell the company, heck the reason teams move is the owners see a more profitable location.
                  Or the league, as an overall entity, should take steps to ensure the financial stability of its members. Thats what businesses do you know. Ensure financial gain. Not just accept multimillion dollar losses by its members as being A O K.

                  You know, like taking steps to keep expenses from outstripping revenues? Who'da thunk that a business would ever do something like that????
                  Last edited by MH Stampede; 03-21-2011, 11:13 PM.
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • Bronco Lover

                    The NFLPA and the Owners are at odds against each other.

                    I haven't seen anything from Roger Goodell about getting both parties back at the bargaining tables, and settling this out of court.

                    The last thing I want is both parties getting hurt here, and I haven't heard or read anything that states Roger Goodell making every effort in getting both sides back at the bargaining tables.

                    It seems to me that Roger needs to do something to get both sides talking.
                    D.E

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by DanEllis View Post
                      The NFLPA and the Owners are at odds against each other.

                      I haven't seen anything from Roger Goodell about getting both parties back at the bargaining tables, and settling this out of court.

                      The last thing I want is both parties getting hurt here, and I haven't heard or read anything that states Roger Goodell making every effort in getting both sides back at the bargaining tables.

                      It seems to me that Roger needs to do something to get both sides talking.
                      Goodell has repeatedly offered to sit back down at the bargaining table. He;s been very public about it too.

                      The players would rather sue than talk.

                      IMO there won't be any real movement other than PR until the april court hearings on the anti-trust suits filed by several players. Once that ruling is made, then we'll see something happen.
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by MH Stampede View Post
                        Goodell has repeatedly offered to sit back down at the bargaining table. He;s been very public about it too.

                        The players would rather sue than talk.

                        IMO there won't be any real movement other than PR until the april court hearings on the anti-trust suits filed by several players. Once that ruling is made, then we'll see something happen.
                        Don't you think that what the NFL is doing has a lot to do with PR as well? Including the "let's get back to the table" talk? And both sides remain far apart from an agreement.

                        And to me, Goodell and Pash are so desperate for mediation and negotiation because they are scared of the court and whatever might be ruled by Law. The players are much more comfortable in presenting their case before the judge.
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Roddoliver View Post
                          Don't you think that what the NFL is doing has a lot to do with PR as well? Including the "let's get back to the table" talk? And both sides remain far apart from an agreement.

                          And to me, Goodell and Pash are so desperate for mediation and negotiation because they are scared of the court and whatever might be ruled by Law. The players are much more comfortable in presenting their case before the judge.
                          Absolutely both sides are playing the PR game.

                          You know the bad press they would get if the players sat down and said, lets talk and they balked??

                          The difference is the owners are willing to talk. The players are only willing to sue.
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Joshecalpoly View Post
                            The Saints lost money in 2005 then the next year they made more then 6 times they lost it happens, the next year the Seahawks Colts Lions Falcons and Vikings were all losing money teams overextend their hand some years and spend more then they can afford they get cap penalties and dont make as much revenue as they planned. A lot of these owners make bad decisions and that is why they lose money.

                            The 2 teams that lost money the Lions and the Dolphins both made money in a 5 year period. The Lions made and average of $9.06 mill a year in operations according to Forbes and the Dolphins made $20.84 mill it is lower then the $30 mill a year average yet they are still making money.
                            The bad desisions are signing players to contracts that the player doesn't live up to. Owners are forced to keep players from leaving this way, and now you want to punish the owner because he signed the player you wanted. Owners should make the money, because they take the risk.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X